Legal Opinion

Tobey v. Claflin

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts

Decided October 15, 1838PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Assumpsit, for work and labor and services, against three defendants [Noah Claflin and others]. The plaintiff [Jonathan Tobey], by his counsel, Bartlett & Webster, now before trial, moved to amend the writ and declaration by striking out the name of David Green, one of the defendants. who cited Bedington v. Farrar, 5 Greenl. 379; Chandler v. Parkes, 3 Esp, 76; and Noke v. Ingham, 1 Wils. 89. The counsel for the plaintiff cited Colcord v. Swan, 7 Mass. 291; and Parsons v.…

Read the full summary

Assumpsit, for work and labor and services, against three defendants [Noah Claflin and others]. The plaintiff [Jonathan Tobey], by his counsel, Bartlett & Webster, now before trial, moved to amend the writ and declaration by striking out the name of David Green, one of the defendants. who cited Bedington v. Farrar, 5 Greenl. 379; Chandler v. Parkes, 3 Esp, 76; and Noke v. Ingham, 1 Wils. 89. The counsel for the plaintiff cited Colcord v. Swan, 7 Mass. 291; and Parsons v. Plai-sted, 13 Mass. 189; and the reasoning of the court in Minor v. Mechanics’ Bank of Alexandria, 1 Pet. [26 U. S.] 46.

1Opinion of the Court

STOBY, Circuit Justice.

The powers of the courts of the United States to grant amendments under the judiciary act of 17S9, c. 20, § 32 [1 Stat. 91], are very large, and have always been construed liberally in furtherance of public justice. In the present case, though the amendment, in a technical sense, may go to the foundation of the suit, if all the defendants are not proved to have joined in the contract; yet it is plain that it does not touch the merits. In the present state of the law, in a suit founded in contract, if all the defendants are not proved at the trial to have made the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Hartness v. ThompsonNew York Supreme Court · 1809
  2. Parsons v. PlaistedMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1816

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Barber v. SmithMichigan Supreme Court · 1879
  2. Portland Gold Min. Co. v. Stratton's Independence, Ltd.District Court, D. Colorado · 1912
  3. Gay v. JoplinU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Missouri · 1882
  4. Partee v. ThomasDistrict Court, W.D. Tennessee · 1882
  5. Rivera Maldonado v. Central Pasto Viejo, Inc.Supreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1933

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API